What's new

China trounces U.S. in AI research output and quality

US has enough STEM graduate? Really? Are international students counted?
View attachment 913533
Dude, maybe word is too complicated for you.

Read this graph from US Census instead

STEM.jpg


Now tell me which side is bigger? The "College Major for Bachelor Degree" group? Or the Occupational Group?

i don't mean the paper you and me wrote

First of all, that's just AI.

Second of all, even if this is true across STEM, that's just STEM. How about research paper for Arts? Law? Economics? and any other discipline that was not STEM??

Again, just because STEM is good in Chinese University, that does not mean Chinese university is good. Russia also have good STEM program, that does not mean people are going to go to Russia and study in dove. Not everyone want to be an engineer or mathematican when he or she grow up, a lot of them want to be lawyer, teacher, company director and so on.
 
.
Well, the article you quote is about Top 2000.......Unless you don't meant to quote that article, otherwise by quoting it, you are mentioning the list in question, that's the same as you say it.

On the other hand, so what Chinese university can produce more and more quality science and research paper?? Does that make your college quality better? How about teacher to student ratio? How about resource management? how about giving your student different discipline? How about the qualifications of the teachers??

I wrote research paper myself, I have a MPhil. Everyone can write research paper, and when you are in a level you have to write research paper, you have to write quality material, I mean, tell me, who in Post Graduate level would wrote non-quality research papers? You aren't going to get your degree that way.....

I don't understand why these "STEM" research reign supreme mentality you people are having, I mean university is more than just STEM research. And unlike what more US TV show think, it's not about drinking and partying and having sex either, you go there to learn, and that not just about STEM and not just about writing paper. If that is the thing you people focus on, no wonder there are only 4 Chinese university in Top 50.

The main reason why Chinese universities is not high in rank. Is that it's hard to get in but easy to pass. It;s even caused problem of having too many graduates for the job markets.
 
.
The main reason why Chinese universities is not high in rank. Is that it's hard to get in but easy to pass. It;s even caused problem of having too many graduates for the job markets.
Well, quality education start with good teachers, I will say Chinese teacher is too "politicalise" to be "good" this is the same problem US is going thru right now, teachers care more about political correctness than to, well, teach.
 
.

China surpassing US in key innovation metric and evolving from ‘imitator’, Washington report says​

  • Global market share of American firms and its allies at risk ‘in most high-value-added, advanced industries’ vital to national prosperity and security
  • Think tank study finds China’s innovation in 2020 was 139 per cent of its US equivalent, up from 78 per cent in 2010


Published: 6:50am, 24 Jan, 2023

bcffbaf1-d0fa-4a12-94b2-012028299bf6_5bd10306.jpg


A robot makes coffee at a hi-tech fair in Shenzhen, China. The report by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation looked at 22 innovation-related indicators. Photo: Xinhua

China has often been dismissed by industrialised nations as a country that is adept at copying but weak at creating, crippled by a memorisation-based education system, excessive respect for authority and a tendency to steal intellectual property. But a study released on Monday finds that China has surpassed the US in one key measure of innovation and is making major strides in another.

The report by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a non-partisan Washington-based think tank focused on US science and technology policy, found that China’s innovation in 2020 was 139 per cent of its US equivalent, up from 78 per cent in 2010.

And based on another metric accounting for the comparative size of their economies and populations, China’s innovation output was three-quarters of US levels, up from 58 per cent in 2010.

“China is evolving from an imitator to an innovator, following a path blazed by its Asian Tiger neighbours – but at a much larger scale, with far greater geopolitical consequences,” said Robert Atkinson, the foundation’s president, who co-authored the report along with research assistant Ian Clay.

China has already displayed great potential for global leadership in several key areas, including supercomputers, space exploration, artificial intelligence, quantum computing and high-speed rail.

“Its innovation capabilities now threaten the global market share of firms from the United States and allied nations in most high-value-added, advanced industries that are important to US prosperity and security,” Atkinson added.

History abounds with developing countries hitting a roadblock, sometimes dubbed the “middle-income trap”, in their bid to join the world’s wealthiest and most technologically advanced economies.
If China with its vast size and population can join that elite club, it would upend global geopolitics, supply chains and power balances for decades, according to the report, titled “Wake Up, America: China Is Overtaking the United States in Innovation Capacity”.

The cost for the US or other advanced nations that lose their hi-tech competitive edge is significantly more consequential than losing ground in low-skill industries given the loss of good-paying jobs, the national security risks and how difficult it is to regain ground after falling behind. Making a single dynamic random access memory semiconductor, for instance, entails more than 1,000 steps.

China accelerated its innovation push under President Xi Jinping, crystallised with the 2015 release of its “Made in China 2025” report. While a blueprint for national advancement is laudable, the foundation said, China’s protectionist and “filching” policies, forced technology transfers, import barriers and subsidised national champion and state-owned companies were less so.

However, the analysis focuses on the 2010-2020 period and does not reflect programmes, funding and initiatives put in place by the administration of President Joe Biden, including the Chips and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

“We have already targeted spending on boosting education and workforce, things that China has been spending on that led to these trends,” said Kellee Wicker, director of the Wilson Centre’s science and technology innovation programme. “So I wouldn’t pick up sticks and move to a different country just yet.”

“They’re saying they’re kind of eating our lunch,” Wicker added of the report. “But that’s only a current trend, and we’re in the middle of taking a brand new tack toward really boosting the stuff they’re talking about.”
Another challenge involving China, analysts said, is that its politics often drive tech policy, and Beijing can be adept at hiding weaknesses and avoiding transparency. This makes it difficult to assess how far ahead or behind the US is in various key areas relative to China. In addition, high youth unemployment rates and Covid-related disruptions have jolted Chinese companies and universities, as they have in the US.

“The US also needs to prioritise thinking through its own technology policies, both from an investment standpoint at home and making sure that we do stay ahead,” said Alexandra Seymour, a technology and national security analyst at the Centre for a New American Security and former Defence Department official.

“I don’t think we’ve suffered from complacency, but we have had an awakening that this is something we need to prioritise.”

Western leaders and technology experts have a long history of underestimating China. Kings College London professor Kerry Brown wrote in The Diplomat in 2014 that Beijing could pour all the money it wanted into R&D parks and churn out legions of engineers, but would stumble in creating globally innovative companies. “The system that China currently has still rewards conformity,” he wrote.

And former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina said: “Although the Chinese are a gifted people, innovation and entrepreneurship are not their strong suits. Their society, as well as their education system, is too homogenised and controlled to encourage imagination and risk-taking.”

Measuring innovation is an inexact science, and China – like Japan and Taiwan before it – has been accused of filing massive numbers of patents for bragging rights and to make it more difficult for foreign competitors to develop or implement their own inventions, utility models or designs.

The foundation examined 22 innovation-related indicators between 2010 and 2020, including venture capital, patents and the amount of value added in advanced industries. It concluded China was making significant gains by almost every indicator.

China’s strongest inroads came in the number and quality of science and engineering articles, the number of patents worldwide related to a particular innovation – known as an international patent family – and the fees it received for its patents and other advances.

By 2020, China tallied more international patent families than the US and published more scientific articles in all fields surveyed, other than in geology, atmospheric and oceanic sciences.

China accounted for 39.6 per cent of the 1.7 million patents granted globally in 2021, the World Economic Forum reported in December, followed by North America with 19.9 per cent and Europe with 11.8 per cent.
But the picture is mixed. China’s research was less influential than American research in every field other than mathematics and statistics, the report said. It has also been weaker than the US in translating innovation to high R&D industries and hi-tech exports.

The report further identified several social trends creating headwinds for China, such as its middle-income status, rapidly ageing population and declining economic productivity.

“I’m still not sold that we’re in these dire straits,” said Wicker, referring to the situation facing the US. “But I do think that, even if we’re not in these dire straits yet, the trends are clear. We should take it seriously.”

 
.
Well, quality education start with good teachers, I will say Chinese teacher is too "politicalise" to be "good" this is the same problem US is going thru right now, teachers care more about political correctness than to, well, teach.
I can imagine some international student accidentally calling xi looks like winnie the pooh and getting sent to the Gulag is not going to improve Chinese university ranking over all.
 
.
I can imagine some international student accidentally calling xi looks like winnie the pooh and getting sent to the Gulag is not going to improve Chinese university ranking over all.
Well, a lot of factor why Chinese University weren't in the list. The Politicalise of Education is one of them, the other is mostly where they put their effort in, if you read what the Chinese PDF poster here talk about, they think "Quality Education" means, more scientific paper and research.

Well, as I said, if they think like that, no wonder only 4 of them are in Top 50 university.
 
.
Although china is speeding in many sectors, its hard to know about AI. But what the US and west does is create the environment and tools that helps grow the field. All these open source models and architectures fuel innovation and actually benefits them and others. Sadly we dont see much from the chinese in this regard.
 
.
Dude, maybe word is too complicated for you.

Read this graph from US Census instead

View attachment 913538

Now tell me which side is bigger? The "College Major for Bachelor Degree" group? Or the Occupational Group?


First of all, that's just AI.

Second of all, even if this is true across STEM, that's just STEM. How about research paper for Arts? Law? Economics? and any other discipline that was not STEM??

Again, just because STEM is good in Chinese University, that does not mean Chinese university is good. Russia also have good STEM program, that does not mean people are going to go to Russia and study in dove. Not everyone want to be an engineer or mathematican when he or she grow up, a lot of them want to be lawyer, teacher, company director and so on.
Again. Are international students counted in this graph? If not, another question, is the unemployment rate of STEM graduates high in US? Why US needs to borrow talents from other countries?

I can imagine some international student accidentally calling xi looks like winnie the pooh and getting sent to the Gulag is not going to improve Chinese university ranking over all.
Well, a lot of factor why Chinese University weren't in the list. The Politicalise of Education is one of them, the other is mostly where they put their effort in, if you read what the Chinese PDF poster here talk about, they think "Quality Education" means, more scientific paper and research.

Well, as I said, if they think like that, no wonder only 4 of them are in Top 50 university.
Data is the most objective thing. What western countries think of China is a piece of shit in front of data. Data shows China dominates most academic fields. AI is just one of them. The consequence always comes late. In next 2-5 years, westerners will witness all kinds of breakthroughs made by China.
 
Last edited:
.
Currently, there are many CEOs and key leaders at American corporations who are foreigners.

Foreigners hold a lot of property, they have a very high social status in American society. Not only in the fields of economy, technology, science, education, they began to influence politics, military and culture...

I think the US is shooting itself in the foot with this model. The interesting thing is that many people still think that the US way is absolutely right.
That's why I support China's no immigrant policy. 成也萧何,败也萧何. Immigrants created US miracle. And will destroy it.
 
.
Again. Are international students counted in this graph? If not, another question, is the unemployment rate of STEM graduates high in US? Why US needs to borrow talents from other countries?

Dude, can you just read the census report you can adjust the graph and if not, you can even read the entire paragraph.

Native Born.jpg


This is a NATIVE-BORN graph, tell me which side is bigger?

And people come to work in the US is not the same as US "borrow" oversea workers. It's not like there is an agreement between US and China to import a certain amount of STEM worker for years. no one is forcing those foreign born STEM worker to come study in the US and work in the US, and no one is forcing the college in US and employer in US to accept Foreign Born STEM worker.
 
.
Dude, can you just read the census report you can adjust the graph and if not, you can even read the entire paragraph.

View attachment 913577

This is a NATIVE-BORN graph, tell me which side is bigger?

And people come to work in the US is not the same as US "borrow" oversea workers. It's not like there is an agreement between US and China to import a certain amount of STEM worker for years. no one is forcing those foreign born STEM worker to come study in the US and work in the US, and no one is forcing the college in US and employer in US to accept Foreign Born STEM worker.
So come back to my second question. The unemployment rate of US native STEM graduate is high. Which means they are not competitive compared with other countries'. Another proof of failed US education.
 
.
So come to my second question, the unemployment rate of US native STEM graduate is high. Which means they are not competitive compared with other countries'
Or hiring foreign born STEM student is cheaper than hiring local STEM worker.

Also, you are talking about the same US system, which turns out the same people who studied there, whether or not they are foreign born and native born, unless you are claiming US college give more "competitive" education system for Foreign born student than local, the "Quality" should be the same because they all come from the same system.
 
.
Or hiring foreign born STEM student is cheaper than hiring local STEM worker.

Also, you are talking about the same US system, which turns out the same people who studied there, whether or not they are foreign born and native born, unless you are claiming US college give more "competitive" education system for Foreign born student than local, the "Quality" should be the same because they all come from the same system.
Not really. For international students, US colleges just reap the fruits when they are about to be ripe.

It's all about money. We all saw the output when China also poured money in its colleges.
 
.
The problem is not that simple.

It is a kind of paradox that occurs in all countries.

The simplest example is in the field of foreign language teaching.

Now there are many foreign English teachers in China. But they are not native speakers from English speaking countries. In fact, they are citizens from countries of the Middle East, Africa, South America or many third world countries. Poor skills, bad pronunciation, poor morals... but they are still admitted to schools in China and are paid better than local teachers.

This kind of humorous paradox happens everywhere. Even Vietnam is the same. Because in my country, there are many English teachers from the Philippines. Poor skills and poor quality, but receive higher salaries than native teachers with better skills and education
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you are not interested in foreign languages, the simplest case is a primary or preschool teacher. In China, there are now black, white....foreign teachers.

- China lacks teachers in preschool or primary education? => No
- Chinese people have no skills, can't do these jobs? => NO

So what the hell is going on here?


There are many Chinese people with advanced degrees who are unemployed and out of work. Indigenous citizens with good skills and morals are not accepted. The leaders of many schools in China are willing to accept foreign nationals with less skills and morals. This is a kind of paradox.

View attachment 913580
China has tightened visa policy for language jobs.
 
.
Not really. For international students, US colleges just reap the fruits when they are about to be ripe.

It's all about money. We all saw the output when China also pourd money in its colleges.
Sure, school in the US put more effort to teach international student than local student. I believe you on this.

The problem for STEM graduate is, as the Census Bureau laid out, more people are willing to hire overseas student because it was bounded to by their visa filter, something like 81% of international students studied STEM ended up working in STEM field in the US, compared to 67% of native born, who were not required or bounded by visa filter.

That mean international students have more incentives to get a STEM job if they want to stay in the US as that is the only way as they are bounded by visa filter, which mean they are prone to offer sub-standard working condition we heard so much about on international worker on H1B visa, it's less likely for a native student to do so, if they have better opportunities outside STEM.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom